From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pf1-f198.google.com (mail-pf1-f198.google.com [209.85.210.198]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD7158E0018 for ; Mon, 10 Dec 2018 18:10:10 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-pf1-f198.google.com with SMTP id b17so10987232pfc.11 for ; Mon, 10 Dec 2018 15:10:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org. [198.145.29.99]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id t64si10268418pgd.202.2018.12.10.15.10.09 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 10 Dec 2018 15:10:09 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2018 18:10:07 -0500 From: Sasha Levin Subject: Re: x86: e820 regression Message-ID: <20181210231007.GI97256@sasha-vm> References: <20181210082837.hjduflu7ou642e2m@YUKI.localdomain> <20181210085421.GA30792@hori1.linux.bs1.fc.nec.co.jp> <20181210094909.GA27385@kroah.com> <20181210142151.xme3ncueelvi3xfa@YUKI.localdomain> <20181210165831.GA97256@sasha-vm> <20181210171555.pjbypquyg6bqjovh@YUKI.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20181210171555.pjbypquyg6bqjovh@YUKI.localdomain> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Erick Cafferata Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 12:15:56PM -0500, Erick Cafferata wrote: >On 12/10 11:58, Sasha Levin wrote: >> On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 09:21:52AM -0500, Erick Cafferata wrote: >> > On 12/10 10:49, Greg KH wrote: >> > > On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 08:54:21AM +0000, Naoya Horiguchi wrote: >> > > > Hi Erick, >> > > > >> > > > On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 03:28:37AM -0500, Erick Cafferata wrote: >> > > > > The following commit introduced a regression on my system. >> > > > > >> > > > > 124049decbb121ec32742c94fb5d9d6bed8f24d8 >> > > > > x86/e820: put !E820_TYPE_RAM regions into memblock.reserved >> > > > > >> > > > > and it was backported to stable, stopping the kernel to boot on my system since around 4.17.4. >> > > > > It was reverted on upstream a couple months ago. >> > > > > commit 2a5bda5a624d6471d25e953b9adba5182ab1b51f upstream >> > > > >> > > > This commit seems not a correct pointer. >> > > > In mainline, commit 124049decbb was reverted by >> > > > >> > > > commit 9fd61bc95130d4971568b89c9548b5e0a4e18e0e >> > > > Author: Masayoshi Mizuma >> > > > Date: Fri Oct 26 15:10:24 2018 -0700 >> > > > >> > > > Revert "x86/e820: put !E820_TYPE_RAM regions into memblock.reserved" >> > > > >> > > > and, the original problem was finally fixed by >> > > > >> > > > commit 907ec5fca3dc38d37737de826f06f25b063aa08e >> > > > Author: Naoya Horiguchi >> > > > Date: Fri Oct 26 15:10:15 2018 -0700 >> > > > >> > > > mm: zero remaining unavailable struct pages >> > > > >> > > > Patch series "mm: Fix for movable_node boot option", v3. >> > > > >> > > > so I think both patches should be backported onto v4.17.z. >> > > >> > > 4.17.y and 4.18.y are long end-of-life, there's nothing I can do there. >> > > >> > > I can apply the above patches to the 4.19.y tree, is that sufficient? >> > > >> > > thanks, >> > > >> > > greg k-h >> > If it were possible to backport it to 4.14 as well. It would be better, >> > but 4.19 is already good. >> > Also, would you port only the revert commit, or also the correct fix for >> > the previous issue? >> > >> > PD: also, as it was pointed out previously, the correct commit is >> > 9fd61bc95130d4971568b89c9548b5e0a4e18e0e. >> > PD2: sorry about removing the context in the previous mail. >> >> 9fd61bc95130d4971568b89c9548b5e0a4e18e0e looks like the commit that >> reverts the patch in question, not an additional fix. >> >> -- >> Thanks, >> Sasha >That's right, that commit is the revert. The commit I'm most interested >in getting backported. However, I was referring to the other 3 commits >affecting arch/x86/kernel/e820.c: > >7e1c4e27928e memblock: stop using implicit alignment to SMP_CACHE_BYTES >57c8a661d95d mm: remove include/linux/bootmem.h >2a5bda5a624d memblock: replace alloc_bootmem with memblock_alloc > >This 3 probably fixed the original issue, for which > >124049decbb1 x86/e820: put !E820_TYPE_RAM regions into memblock.reserved > >was pushed. I was asking if those 3(or more, if needed) would get >backported as well. >regards + linux-mm@ These commits touch quite a lot of code, and even though they look simple they are quite invasive, so I wouldn't want to take them without a proper backport someone tested and acked by the mm folks. -- Thanks, Sasha